Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Cipla Limited vs Union Of India & Anr on 14 July, 2020

Author: Navin Chawla

Bench: Navin Chawla

$~13
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+   W.P.(C) 3358/2020 & CM No. 11870/2020
    CIPLA LIMITED                                ..... Petitioner
                    Through: Ms.Archana Sahadeva, Adv. along
                              with Mr.Pylla Jayavardhan, AR of the
                              petitioner.

                         versus

    UNION OF INDIA & ANR.                             ..... Respondents
                  Through:          Mr.Kirtiman Singh, CGSC with
                                    Mr.Waize Ali Noor, Mr.Rohan
                                    Anand, Advs. with Mr.Syed Husain
                                    Adil Taqvi, GP.

    CORAM:
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
                    ORDER

% 14.07.2020

1. This hearing has been held by video conferencing.

2. On 05.06.2020, the hearing of the petition was adjourned at the request of the learned counsel for the respondents who sought time to seek instructions.

3. On 10.06.2020, the learned counsel for the respondents requested to file a brief synopsis of submissions on the application of the petitioner for interim stay. Such submissions were filed by both the parties. Thereafter, a request for adjournment on behalf of the respondents was also entertained on 18.06.2020 and 09.07.2020.

4. Today, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that he would wish to file a detailed counter affidavit to the contents of the petition. He may do so within four weeks from today. Rejoinder, if any be filed within three weeks thereafter.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has increased the prices of the drugs strictly in accordance with Paragraph 20 of The Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 2013. The learned counsel for the petitioner has explained the nature of the increase by way of a chart which forms part of the petition.

6. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of paragraph 20 as it is applicable only to Scheduled Drugs as also the benefit is confined to rounding of upto two decimal points.

7. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties and in view of the judgment dated 06.02.2020 of this Court in WP(C) No.1586/2016 titled M/s Obsurge Biotech Ltd. vs. Union of India & Anr., there shall be a stay on the operation of the impugned demand till the next date of hearing.

8. List on 28th September, 2020.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J JULY 14, 2020 RN